About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
went down in the last the election, too. >> went down from the standpoint that they lost to democrats unlike some of these mr. murdoch for instance. we are supposed to wonder chris richard murdoch, indiana. >> why we don't have the women's vote when we have a candidate suggesting that a child born as a result of rape is a gift from god. i'm not wondering why we don't have more women voting for republicans. >> chris: let me ask you about that. karl rove called the conservative victory project to try to get into the the primaries to make sure there are more electable republicans. congressman you are about to start your own super pac to promote electable candidates in republican primaries. have any problem with that. first of all, why do you think that is wrong? >> i think the definition of electable is what we are debating here and you you look at who has been winning elections. it has been interesting exciting young inne energetic e like ted cruz and marco rubio and if you apply the establishment litmus test which tends to be biased for people already in office you will not get the new
will indicate that through elections and primaries and referendums. i think one of the lessons of roe versus wade is when the court goes too far it weakens our respect for judicial institutions and they would be far better off to decide the two cases on the narrow west possible grounds. >> chris: you wouldn't want to see a sweeping decision against. >> it would further undermine respect for the judiciary. >> chris: senator bayh how far would you want the court to go? >> the second question involves trying to read the mind of justice kennedy. my guess is he would be reluctant to strike down the laws of 41 states that prohibit same-sex marriage or only allow civil unions. i think he will seek some sort of middle ground. >> chris: and what would you like to see? >> i think the time has come for society to accept this union between two individuals. i think it is from a conservative point of view individuals supporting one another, supporting their families so that society at large does not have to is good for the rest of us. >> chris: would you like to see the court declare a big constitutional
. if that is true, over time the american people will indicate that through elections and primaries and referendums. they would be far better off to decide the cases on the narrowest possible grounds. >> chris: you wouldn't want to see a sweeping decision against -- >> a huge mistake and undermine respect for the judiciary. >> chris: senator, how far would you like to see the court go and how far do you expect them to go. >> it means trying to read the mind of justice kennedy and my guess is he'd be reluctant to strike down the laws of the 41 states that currently prohibit same sex marriage or allow civil unions. but, on the other hand, seize the broad sweep of history here, the direction the country is moving, which is to embrace same sex unions, morerobustly and i k you will see middle ground. >> i think the time has come for our society to accept the union between two individuals. i think it is, from a conservative point of view, individuals supporting one another, supporting their families, so that society at large does not have to, is good for the rest of us. >> chris: but, would you like to s
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)